(Refer Slide Time: 1:30)

Transcription

1 Great Experiments in Psychology Professor Rajlakshmi Guha Centre for Educational Technology Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur Module 2 Lecture No 10 Milgram s Study on Obedience Hello everybody and welcome to the final lecture of the second week of a Great experiments in psychology. This lecture week was on cognitive and social psychology and the lectures on discussions on cognitive and social psychology the great experiments in studies in cognitive and social psychology will not end if we do not talk about Milgram. Stanley Milgram is one of the major figures in the studies on social psychology and specially because his research created a surge of interest in obedience and this was followed up by a large number of studies later on and this study not only was it important because of the things that it revealed, but it was also important because it brought in the in the issue of ethics in psychological research. (Refer Slide Time: 1:30) So, today we are going to discuss about Stanley Milgram and his study on obedience. So his study started with a very interesting phenomena so he very interesting background in 1961, when he was going to start this study were two major events that were happening and around the same time later on researchers across the world linked them together and saw that they could be fused and unified and to form an explanation for the model of evil that dominated popular and scientific thinking for more than half a century. So what was happening? In 1961 there was something going on at Jerusalem district Court and at the same time around in the psychology laboratory at Yale University.

2 (Refer Slide Time: 2:13) So basically in the Jerusalem court, Adolf Eichmann he was the head of Reice Main Security Office Sub Department during World War II that is he was very close confidant of Adolf Hitler was being tried in court in Jerusalem. So basically this is post-world War as you can understand Adolf Eichmann one of the major proponents or major people individual responsible for deportation and sending the Jews large number of Jews to thousands and thousands of Jews to the gas chambers. He basically dealt with the evacuation and he was he after the World War II he had fled to Argentina he was well settled their and then the Israeli intelligence society that is Mosad, they identified him and they kidnapped and got him back to Jerusalem to Israeli. And in 1961 he was being tried for his major for his war crimes, crimes against humanity and crime against the Jewish people. And on 11 April 1961 the trial began and Adolf Eichmann was seen by the public for the first time. So it created a huge uproar, if you ask people at your home who were present during that time, you will see that or if you just go through the newspaper and documents during that time you will see there was a huge uproar across the world, primarily because Adolf Eichmann had been identified and he was being tried and the other one was that he was the way the Mosad actually captured him from Argentina and identified captured him and brought him back to Israel. So, but the other uproar that came about was when Adolf Eichmann was first seen by the media. So what was expected? Most of the people across the world were expecting somebody who would be a stern German Nazi soldier like as our images are from what we see in the movies and at that point of time people who do remember German leaders. So strangely

3 Eichmann was nothing of the kind. Instead of a strutting arrogant Nazi officer, he was he here he was very non-descript he was hunched, he was an insignificant balding man and he was very thin also. (Refer Slide Time: 04:45) So that this created quite a surprise for most of the people who were present in court that day and for the people across the world who were seeing it through media. And he basically sat behind a bullet-proof glass wall and he was busy taking notes of whatever was of the court proceedings. Now in that court was present another very famous German philosopher and historian named Hannah Arendt and Arendt later wrote a book on Eichmann in Jerusalem and he introduced a phrase Banality of evil. Now, will come to the idea of Eichmann later of Arendt later, but she is a first one who actually propose the idea that these people who commit acts of crime are not always a participant in the idea of developing the crime, but most of the time as Arendt proposed Eichmann and people like him were moved less by great hatred than by petty desire to do a task well and to please their superiors. Indeed they concentrated so much on the task, this is what Arendt thought, that they forgot most about their consequences Eichmann had no motives at all, he merely never realize what he was doing. This is Arendt s idea, of course there was an uproar about Arendt s idea also because the Jews who had suffered or whose family had suffered did not agree with this view and this idea that ordinary people can commit extra ordinary acts of evil through sheer inattention, this idea

4 was absolutely unbelievable and it was extremely controversial, but this idea gradually found more evidence through research studies. (Refer Slide Time: 7:18) So now on one hand we have Eichmann being produced in court and he was being tried and on the other hand there was Stanley Milgram and his study on obedience. Now why have they mention about Adolf Eichmann, basically because Stanley Milgram sitting in Yale University was also thinking on the lines of obedience and aggression and why the Germans behave the way they did? Now just we will have to just look at Milgram s background a little. Milgram was born in 1933 the year Hitler came to power he was born to Jewish parents actually from East Europe and the parents and he they all followed the war very closely trying to understand how the Jews were being treated across the world especially in Europe. And this background actually impacted his research and his initial research Milgram s initial research was on conformity. He tried to see that whether nations especially Germany, did they differ in their degree of conformity as compared to the other nation. Then gradually he shifted his research to studies on obedience and just about the time when Eichmann s trial was close that is around 14 August 1961 Eichmann s trial was close, a week earlier the 7 August 1961, Stanley Milgram began his obedience experiment at Yale University. So you see how the geopolitical conditions of the world also influence the psychological movement. We have talked about is in the previous week basically, when we are talking about the development of psychology through the developments in physics and physiology and now we are talking about the social condition.

5 (Refer Slide Time: 9:30) So the world Wars had major impacts specially the Second World War and major impact in the approach in the research arena of the psychologist and this study just shows, see how the researchers are also thinking Milgram s background influence the way his research was taking progress and Milgram in this study specially during the study of obedience he started with the hypothesis that Germans are different and it is actually known as Germans are different hypothesis. They are several studies that has been done with this and Milgram was originally actually trying to test this by hypothesis and this was actually Germans have different hypothesis this is was actually proposed by the Jews, Poles and others where this was proposed by historians because of their destruction political destruction of Jews, Poles and others during the 30s and 40s. And this hypothesis maintains that Hitler could not have put his plans in action unless they were cooperation of thousands of others and these thousands of others had to believe in these evil views that Hitler had, so Germans were different and the Germans have a basic character defect, namely a readiness to obey without question, regardless of acts demanded by the authority figure, and it is this readiness to obey which provide Hitler with the cooperation he needed. So basically this is the second part the hypothesis of the second postulate was what Milgram was trying to test, so that these through his experiments on obedience. So Milgram was actually trying to show that, yes Germans were indeed different, they would definitely obey they had readiness obey without question, they would regardless of no matter what acts was demanded by the authority figure and this readiness actually helped Hitler to put so much of

6 violence into place, okay. So Milgram actually planned to do this experiment in Germany but before that he had a trial run in America at Yale University and this was basically a dummy run and later on it was seen that his trip to Germany was unnecessary because the GADH that is the Germans are different hypothesis that failed. (Refer Slide Time: 11:43) Now what happened, so on the assumption that Milgram expected to collect data in Germany that would support the Germans are different hypothesis, the 1963 study, by implication predicted that there would be very low level of obedience when Americans participant were instructed to deliver increasingly intense electric shocks the highest shock level being lifethreatening to a fellow participant. So Milgram just to show that the Germans are different he was going to test that he was planning to do that in Germany, so he tried a dummy run in America and there this was his hypothesis that the Americans would deliver increasingly would have very low level of obedience and they would not deliver life-threatening shock to a fellow participant. Now to test this he used the remote victim experiment and later on the voice feedback experiment.

7 (Refer Slide Time: 13:02) So what did the so it was implied that American participant would show very low levels of obedience and they would not give shock as we can well understand this hypothesis and what Milgram asked was 14 psychology student to predict what would happen if 100 participant in the remote victim experiment. We will discuss about the experiment, but as was obvious the psychology student they thought that very few participant would continue up to the highest shock level and 40 psychiatrists also predicted that less than one person would administer the highest voltage, now the highest voltage mind you would be around 450 volts. (Refer Slide Time: 13:54) Now let us see what this experiment was about, so this experiment was about delivering shocks to individual to another fellow participant who was in a learning experiment where if

8 the fellow participant made an error then he would be given a shock. Now this study now coming to the experimental design, it was rather a control observation that an experiment and observation was used for collecting data and tape recorder, photographs and later on and even film recordings of the proceedings made and along with that, post-experimental interviews were conducted and lots of qualitative and quantitative data was collected along with this. The Sample size was 40 males aged between 20 and 50 years and from different educational and occupational backgrounds, so they answered advertisements which was sent by post or appeared in local newspapers, asking for volunteers for a study of memory and learning. So they were to participate in a memory and learning experiment to be conducted at Yale University and this was put up on the newspapers and people who were volunteered were called and they would be paid around for. 4.5 per hour and when the participants arrived at the Yale University, they met Jack Williams and supposedly he was the experimenter. Mind you see this is a scripted stage, so Jack Williams here was the experimenter and they were also introduced to a Mr Wallace who was another participant of this study. Mr Wallace was a stooge now you already know what a stooge is, stooge is an experimenter s confidant where he is helping out the proceedings of an experiment he is most of the time present in the experimental situation acting as the catalyst to drive the way of the experiment. So most and the participant who is actually the subject in this case is generally not aware of the stooge as an experimenter s confidant, he thinks the stooge is also a fellow participant. And Mr Wallace was introduced as another participant, he was actually a stooge he was a very well-behaved and mild mannered and likeable individual and all the other participants generally liked him, okay.

9 (Refer Slide Time: 16:09) Now the participant and Mr Wallace were both told that the experiment was concerned with the effects of punishment on learning and one of them was to be the teacher, and the other was to be the learner, so their roles were determined by each drawing a piece of paper from a hat. It was randomly done but actually it was not random, so every time it was planned in such a way that every time each participants, so there were 40 male participants as we saw, so each participant would actually be the teacher and Mr Wallace would happen to be the learner. So now they after that they all went to the adjoining room where Mr Wallace was strapped into an electric chair apparatus. So the experimenter explained that the straps were to prevent excessive movement when the learner was being shocked and electrodes were attached to the learner s wrist and electrode paste applied to show that to avoid blister and burns. So what is being done, the participants here in this case who is going to be the teacher is already being giving information that this is going to be painful when the shock is being given and the electrodes were attached to the shock generator situated next door. So the teacher and the experimenter then moved into the room so the teacher is the participant and the experimenter this case is Mr Jack Williams and they move to the next room and where the generator was kept and the teacher in this case, actually the participant is given of 45 volts shock to convince him that it was real and he was conducting an experiment where real shock would be given to the Mr Wallace to the subject. Now the strange thing is that this was the only shock that was actually delivered throughout the experiment.

10 (Refer Slide Time: 18:42) So the subject or in this case the learner that is Mr Wallace who was sitting inside the room never got a shock at all, but this was done to make the participant belief that the shock was going to be given and so that is why he also got the taste of the shock so that was of only 45 volts. So the generator and the switches and everything was shown and this was shown that the shock would start with 15 volts and it would go up to 450 volts maximum and with the experiment if there was an error then there would be a shock would be given and that would be actually by increment of 15 volts. So then they were also the subject in this case the participant who is going to be the trainer was shown that what was slight shock and what was moderate shock, what was strong shock, very strong shock, intense shock, intense to extreme shock, danger or severe shock all that was shown to him, okay.

11 (Refer Slide Time: 19:26) So after that what was the technique that was to be followed here Mr Wallace who was the learner was already strapped and kept in the electric chair and outside the participants or the teacher here was in a separate settings, so he could not see the subject who was being shocked that is Mr Wallace was been shock, but he could hear the sound okay and the work was that he would have to read out a series of words pairs like blue girl, nice day, fat neck and after one pair there would be then the first one of the pair would be told and it would be followed by five words of which the original had to be identified. The learner who was learning these pairs had to choose the correct response to the stimulus word by pressing one of the four switches, which turned on a light on a panel in the generator room. So that is where the experimenter and the teacher would be and the teacher would actually then if there was an error he would give a there was a mistake then he would press the shock button. So before delivering each shock the teacher had to announce the voltage level. Now what would happen is, if there were too many errors and it crossed 300 Mr Wallace would pound loudly on the wall at 300 volts and at 315 volts after 315 volts he would stop pounding and give no further answers. Now if he did not respond, the teacher was to take as an error and then he would be also be giving further shocks till 450 volts. Now do you think that people would be willing to give such shocks? Knowing that once they have tasted a 45 volts shock do you think a person would go up to 10 times more to give 450 volts shock.

12 (Refer Slide Time: 21:40) Now let us see what happens and here the experimenter also would notch the subject to give the shock several times he would say like please continue please go on, the experiment requires that you continue, it is absolutely essential that you continue, you have no other choice you must go on. But the prods or the notches would always be in very in a firm tone but not very impolite and there were also something special to notch or to urge the subject to continue and that would be like that is the teacher to continue in this case where the shocks may be painful but there is no permanent issue damage so please go on. Now what was expected? What do you think the participants would do? Let us see what they did. (Refer Slide Time: 22:30)

13 These are the results you can go through it later but every participant shocked up to at least 300 volts now that is shocking, 5 refused to go beyond 300, 4 more gave one further shock before refusing so they went up till 315 volts, 4 broke off at 330 volts and one each at 345, 360 and 375 volts. This makes total of 14 defiant participants, so out of mind you 40 participants. 26 participants or that 65% were obedient participants, they went all the way up to 450 volts. Many did so under extreme stress, some expressed reluctant to shock beyond 300 volts, showing many of the fears that the defiant participant displayed. At the end of the experiment, many heaved a sighs of relief, mopped the browse, some shook their head in regret but some had remained calm throughout. So what does that tell you? That many of the Americans too or if you could conduct this experiment anywhere in the world many people would remain calm throughout and still want administering the shock see now these participants had no idea that Mr Wallace or the subject was sitting inside the electric room was actually not being shocked. So they knew they had tasted the 45 volts shock and they knew or they felt that this was being given 10 times more, but still 26 people actually went up till 450 volts, all the participants knew that how much would actually crossed the danger zone so they went beyond the danger zone to give the shock to administer the shock.

14 (Refer Slide Time: 24:41) So what did Milgram conclude from this study, so he said that despite having learned from childhood that it is morally wrong to hurt other people against their will, 65% of this crosssection of an ordinary American town abandoned this principle in following the instructions of an authority figure who had no special power to enforce his commands. They would not have been punished or suffered any material loss had they disobeyed. See, they were actually paid the money before they became a part of the experiment and they were also told that you know it was initially sign that they could sign off from the experiment anytime they wanted, but still they went on with their tendency to obey. The extraordinary tension and emotional strain caused by the procedure was present in both the defiant and as well as the obedient participants. So that also tells us a lot that you know it is not that innate nature to actually harm others, but it is also this tension that was present in the people who said no and who did not say no. So though they these people they obeyed, most of them were very disturbed by it and that was one of the reasons why this experiment were had to be stopped, so ethically this was not right.

15 (Refer Slide Time: 26:02) Subsequent research by Moghaddam and Turnbull showed that you know this type of behaviour this type of obedience and this type of aggressive behaviour is seen violent behaviour is seen in a situation where the environmental condition are adverse and Moghaddam and Turnbull studied ik, a traditional hunter gatherer people now living in Uganda, near the Kenya border. Social life there involves extreme selfishness and total concerned with personal survival, to such an extent that parents deprive their children of food, and children even refuse water to aged parents. The explanation they say seems to lie in the terrible condition in which they live. Formally hunter gatherer roaming freely in search of game, they were forced by modernisation and national boundaries to leave in a confined territory with very limited natural resources. Life became a fierce struggle for survival to the extent that they seem to have completely abandoned the values we associate with human social life. So what they suggested that in such extreme condition similar to those in Nazi concentration camps, many of the values we normally associate with human nature they disappeared and these underlined the power of the situation and these shape behaviour and Moghaddam to court him he said that our behaviour it seems, is much more dependent on the social contexts than the dominant western model of self-contained individualism assumes. Now this also so several research continued after Milgram study and Milgram study as I mentioned that one of the major constraints was the ethical issue where Milgram had actually not informed the participants about the nature of the experiment and as in they were not told

16 that this individual was not being shocked and the emotional distress that it created in the participants who several of them broke off as I mentioned, so this created an uproar about the type of psychological research how it should be you know, whether it should be permitted or not. But Milgram as he said that you know obedience the obedience domain not be explored if the individuals were actually the participant was actually aware of the idea of the experiment, so they had to be debrief later. You could not do such an experiment without with taking them into confidence. I mean if you wish to see obedience and how would you actually inform them before and then see they were being obedient or not. (Refer Slide Time: 29:04) So Milgram s research they have left the impression that situational pressure completely outweigh personality factors in determining obedience and I was following orders was of course one of the major defence that was made by the Nazi war criminals during the (()) (29:18) trials. But this also showed you know the of course legally they were the plea of not guilty on ground of obedience was duly rejected and this suggested that there is more to obedience than the agentic state. So basically, this research with this also began several other researchers and Zimbardo carried out his prison experiments following this where he studied the aggressive behaviour and of course when we are talking of social psychology, in no way we can we miss out Milgram s and Zimbardo study. But unfortunately we had only five lectures so which I had to share between cognitive and social psychology, so these are the major areas that I felt need to be discussed when we try to

17 establish psychology as a science and maybe sometime later if we have an opportunity to discuss several other major studies that were brought about by the geopolitical conditions of the time also that actually addressed the contemporary issues maybe we will come up with that later okay, Thank you so much.